ACADEMIC SENATE ATTENDANCE & MINUTES
4th October 2011
Adjunct Faculty
Sue Ellen Warren_______________X
Leah Pate
X
Behavioral & Social Sciences
Firestone, Randy
Gold, Christina
X
Moen, Michelle __________EXCUSED
Widman, Lance
_X
Wynne, Michael
X
Business
Siddiqui, Junaid________________X
Lau, Philip S _________________X
VACANT
Counseling
Jackson, Brenda _____________X
Pajo, Christina
X
Sabio, Sabra__________________X
Vaughn, Dexter_______________X
Key, Ken
Fine Arts
Ahmadpour, Ali
X
Bloomberg, Randall
X
Crossman, Mark
Schultz, Patrick _________________X
Wells, Chris
__ X
Health Sciences & Athletics
Hazell, Tom ____________EXCUSED
Colunga, Mina
X
Baily, Kim___________________X
Holt, Kelly____________________X
VACANT
Humanities
Isaacs, Brent ____________________X
Marcoux, Pete __________________X
McLaughlin, Kate_______EXCUSED
Halonen, Briita__________________X
Simon, Jenny _______________
X
Industry & Technology
Gebert, Pat
X
Hofmann, Ed_______________X
MacPherson, Lee
Winfree, Merriel
X
Marston, Doug
Learning Resources Unit
Striepe, Claudia
X
Ichinaga, Moon
______X
Mathematical Sciences
Bateman, Michael
X
Hamza Hamza________________X
Sheynshteyn, Arkadiy__________X
Taylor, Susan
X
VACANT
Natural Sciences
Doucette, Pete
Herzig, Chuck ________________X
Jimenez, Miguel ______________X
Palos Teresa__________________X
VACANT
Academic Affairs & SCA
Arce, Francisco
X
Nishime, Jeanie
X
Lee, Claudia__________________X
Lam, Karen
ECC CEC Members
Evans, Jerome
Norton, Tom________________X
Panski, Saul _________________X
Pratt, Estina_________________X
Halligan, Chris
Odanaka, Michael____________X
Assoc. Students Org.
Asher, Rebekka
VACANT
Ex- Officio Positions
Shadish, Elizabeth______________X
Guests, Dean’s Rep, Visitors:
Carolyn Pineda, Irene Graff, Alice Grigsby,
Joshua Rosales
Unless noted otherwise, all page numbers refer to the packet used during the meeting, not the current
packet you are reading now.
The third Academic Senate meeting of the Fall 2011 semester was called to order by Academic Senate
President Gold at 12:35pm
Academic Senate President Gold made announcements re: the last meeting minutes being available in a
separate packet, and the availability of a packet of supplementary materials.
Approval of last Minutes:
The minutes of the September 20th meeting were approved.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS
Academic Senate President’s report – Christina Gold (henceforth CG)
[See pp 13- 21 of packet]
 College Council. [see pp. 13-16 of packet for the minutes of the Sept.19th and 26th meetings] The
Council has been discussing its goals, and CG included the Academic Senate’s recommendations
for goals, especially pertaining to issues of trust and collegiate co-operation. The College Council
also conducted a self- evaluation [see pp.17- 18 of packet for results of survey] President Fallo
wants to bring to the Board of Trustees a recommendation to ban smoking on campus. The last
campus survey had proposed a restriction on smoking to certain areas.
 The ASO announced that they are considering drafting a resolution asking for the restitution of
some Winter classes.
 Council of Deans. [see pp. 19- 21 of packet for notes from the Sept. 8th meeting] The issue of wait
lists was discussed.
 Crossover Enrollment Report. [See pp.22 – 23 of packet]It was noted that students ARE
increasingly moving between the two campuses (ECC and CEC), and 2 slides detailing this crossover movement were shared. Mr. Rosales from Institutional Research briefly spoke on interesting
issues raised by these slides. Mr. Rosales noted that “finishing at” does not necessarily mean
“graduating from”, but rather that in their last year the student was registered at that campus
exclusively. Mr. Panski noted that some of the increased movement may be attributable to the
fact that when classes were cut at ECC, student took those same classes at CEC. However Mr.
Panski noted that now CEC is operating under the same constraints as ECC so some of that
movement may fade.
 Facilities Steering Committee. [see pp. 24- 29 of packet for minutes of the Sept. 12th meeting]
the minutes detail the progress made on the various building projects.
 Accreditation Mid-term Report. CG reported that this report is now in its final draft. CG noted
that she had sent further comments on the Governance section. Dr. Nishime said she felt CG’s
comments were well put. Mr. Widman asked whether, should the official report remain sanitized,
we would be submitting our own Academic Senate report? CG said we should wait and see what
the final draft looks like and whether her new comments have been included before making that
decision.
VP Compton Education Center - Saul Panski (SP)
President Elect, Compton Center Faculty Council– Michael Odanaka (MO)
SP reported that the CEC had had troubles with its budget, and had been given an extension until October
19th. A Board Meeting is scheduled for October 18th. SP said the budget was to be revealed to the campus
today at 3:30pm and SP is hopeful it will meet the 50% law.
SP said that Chancellor Scott had been forced to cancel his visit to the CEC due to jury duty, and will
reschedule.
SP reported that the new Special Trustee has removed the Board from roll call and voting, in response to
questions from the Accreditation Committee. The Special Trustee is having the Board, Faculty, Student
Leadership, and Classified staff rotate on the dais. As per AB 318, only the Special Trustee will vote on
items.
Curriculum Committee – Jenny Simon (JS)
JS said she had attended a regional meeting on Responsibility. No final decisions had been made on the
issue and JS expects that colleges will be told that only a certain percentage of FTES will be generated by
repeats and to make their own arrangements. They are adopting a wait and see attitude..
VP Educational Policies Committee – Merriel Winfree (MW)
No report.
VP Faculty Development –Briita Halonen (BH) (Co-VP) and Moon Ichinaga (MI) (Co-VP)
[See Supplementary Materials handout for the minutes of the Sept. 27th Faculty Development Committee
meeting]
MI reported that the “Getting the Job” Workshop is still a go for October 28th in the Alondra Room, but
the time has changed to run from 9:00am – 10:00am. Senators are asked to please alert adjuncts in their
Divisions.
Invitations are being sought for the “Outstanding Adjunct” award. October 4th is the deadline for
nominations. BH said that a panel, including two faculty members and a student, would be needed to
review the nominations.
The Library and Faculty Development are co-operating on a reading and discussion program “California
Reads”. The theme of the “California Reads” program is Democracy, and it is hoped that discussion on
democracy and civil rights will be generated as the country gears up for its next elections. The key note
speaker for the start of the program is Jeanne Houston, author of “Farewell to Manzanar” on November
17th. CG noted the Committee should try and get a bigger venue than the currently proposed East Dining
Room.
VP Finance and Special Projects – Lance Widman (LW)
No report. LW did mention that December 13th was the date set for a reassessment and update on the
California State income, and the reassessment could lead to certain triggers, including an increase in fees
and significant cutbacks. These possible scenarios would go into effect in Summer. Dr. Arce said all were
hoping for no more Schedule cuts.
VP Legal – Chris Wells (CW)
CW mentioned a Bill that had passed last year to form a Taskforce on Student Success. Some
recommendations are now coming from this taskforce that will have an impact on community
colleges.
SPECIAL COMMITTEE REPORTS
Assessment of Learning Committee - Kelly Holt (KH)
KH reported that the Committee is still looking at SLO’s at the institutional level. The committee will be
hosting a Critical, Creative, and Analytical Thinking competency Summit on Thursday November 10th.
KH urged faculty participation at this event intended to present reports and reflection on the data gathered
on this competency. KH noted that refreshments will be available.
KH noted that the next core competency to be assessed this semester is that of Professional and Personal
Growth. The pilot survey is going out tomorrow, and it is expected that the finalized survey will be ready
late October. Courses chosen for this survey will be based on the original mapping notations.
KH noted that CurricUNET is back in business, if a little slow. The SLO module is ready and in good
shape. KH said that there are many incomplete reports so faculty are urged to check their reports.
Approximately only 35% are complete and the ALC hopes for 75% completion by the end of the
semester.
Mr. Ahmadapour asked whether the personal and professional growth referred to students and KH
answered yes, we are assessing student competency in this area.
KH shared some contact information:
Torrance Coordinators: Kelly Holt, x3249, kholt@elcamino.edu and Kaysa Laureano, x5203,
klaureano@elcamino.edu
Compton Coordinator: Chelvi Subramaniam, x2235, csubramaniam@elcamino.edu
Division Facilitators:
Division Facilitators
Behavioral and Social Sciences: Janet Young x3613, jyoung@elcamino.edu
Business: Kurt Hull , x3775, khull@elcamino.edu
Fine Arts: Chris Mello, x5719, cmello@elcamino.edu
Health Sciences and Athletics: Sandy Bartiromo, x3279, sbartiro@elcamino.edu ; Russell Serr, x3811,
rserr@elcamino.edu
Humanities: Rachel Williams, x5185, rawilliams@elcamino.edu
Industry & Tech: Ray Lewis, x3348, rlewis@elcamino.edu ; Sue Ellen Warren, x4519,
sewarren@elcamino.edu
Mathematical Sciences: Junko Forbes, x7217, jforbes@elcamino.edu
Natural Sciences: Jim Noyes, x3356, tnoyes@elcamino.edu
Compton Education Center: Fazal Aasi, x2316, faasi@elcamino.edu; Michelle Priest, x2314,
mpriest@elcamino.edu
Academic Technology Committee – Pete Marcoux (PM)
PM noted that Director Grigsby would be presenting on a Distance Education survey later in the meeting.
Mr. Wagstaff of ITS noted that ECC has an Enterprise version of the Etudes course management system.
This means all faculty can use it in their classes but faculty must take the training class to be certified. PM
noted that the Academic Senate could have its own class module on the system to share documents and
chate, etc.
PM brought up the problems we are having with the Wait-List, for instance students who pay for some
classes but do not pay for a wait-listed class until they are accepted are dropped from ALL classes if they
miss the payment deadline, and sometimes students are not aware that they have been accepted into the
wait-listed class until it is too late. Mr. Wagstaff noted that about 1,000 students have been impacted.
Dr. Nishime asked if this was not a programming issue? PM said he had been told it was preventable. Dr.
Gold asked if this was not an issue for enrollment management. Dr. Arce said enrollment management is
aware of the issue. Mr. Wagstaff noted that the software has three levels of permissions and Colleague
does NOT allow students to enroll in multiple sections of the same course, however the students CAN
wait-list in multiple courses. Mr. Ahmadapour noted that this issue could result in lawsuits.
Dr. Arce asked that information and feedback on the problem be gathered and sent to Mr. Mulrooney, and
hopefully a report can be generated on the issue by the end of October. Mr. Wagstaff noted that the most
important information needed is the student name and ID number in order to be able to rectify matters.
PM reported on the technology plan, noting that ITS had install over 800 new pieces of equipment and
software, and that there is a constant tug on resources. Classroom issues get priority. PM noted that it is
vital for faculty to note technology requests on their plans and in Program Review. There is a need to
centralize technology operations and a common list needs to be built up. When making plans and writing
Program Reviews, Divisions should also note the support needed/lack of support in writing.
PM said that the next meeting date is still to be announced, but will probably occur in late November or
early December, and the discussion will be on software.
Mr. Ahmadapour felt that there was a lack of accountability from ITS and asked why this was allowed.
Problems traced to ITS seem to go nowhere.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS - DISCUSSION
Distance Education Report and Discussion
1. Institutional Research. DE Spring 2011 Report - -Joshua Rosales (JR)
JR presented information and two short articles pertaining to issues in Distance
Education, including:
Who are DE students? JR noted that 2/3 of DE students are female. The racial
demographic is similar to the “real” campus. The majority of DE students are part-timers
(meaning less than 12 units), and most are between the ages of 18-24.
Success and Retention statistics. JR shared a graph comparing ECC and State rates in DE
for the last 5 years. ECC has been increasing its success rates. Mr. Widman asked
whether retention meant a student sticking with the class for the semester. JR said this is
so. Mr. Widman noted the spike in 2009 and assumed it was because ECC was trying to
grow the DE program at that time. AG said there had been a big infusion of support for
the DE program at that time, so more sections had been supported.
Mr. Widman asked whether online classes would be cut during the Winter session? AG
said a decision had been made to use the 8 week or longer format for DE classes so a
shorter 6 week format would not be offered. Mr. Widman asked if there was any data to
justify this. AG said that the DE program had been dinged during Accreditation and so
the DEAC had made the decision to focus on the main semesters for the while. Dr. Gold
noted that Winter had shown great success rates.
Discrepancies between certain Divisions and Departments. Another graph compared the
success and retention rated between courses offered online and on campus. JR said IR
had not really investigated why the results gave this information - -the graph was just
informational at this stage.
2. Distance Education Advisory Committee. DEAC Efforts on Behalf of Student
Success and Retention - Alice Grigsby (AG)
AG noted that DE continues to be an area of growth, and success and retention rates are
growing too.
DEAC is made up of faculty members and Learning Resources Unit members aiming to
continue this growth and improvement.
One reason for the success of the classes is that faculty members seem to be more
involved with the classes. All classes are evaluated for technical as well as subject
content and this is discussed with faculty. All DE faculty use a CMS of some kind which
gives a basic structure. The Enrollment management Committee provides funding and
collaboration.
AG reported that 2 initiatives have been planned:
Online Tutoring in 2 areas – for CIS online students, and Net Tutor which will be
available late in the evening for writing assignments regardless of class.
A Distance Education Institute Initiative on November 17 &18 to help faculty improve
their strategies for success. November 17th will feature a dinner, keynote speaker, and
will showcase some faculty strategies. November 18th will feature all day sessions,
Etudes demonstrations and lunch.
Mr. Panski asked if Compton faculty in the DE arena were invited as well. AG noted that
after the first enrollment, and invitation would be extended to Compton as well.
Discussion of Past constitutional Amendments and Possible Faculty-wide Votes – Christina
Gold (CG)
[see Supplementary Materials packet] CG noted these items
1. A Constitutional Amendment allowing for electronic voting procedures had been passed
by the Senate and faculty at large. This needs to be inserted into the Constitution and ByLaws. CG needs feedback on how to proceed.
2. Constitutional Amendment regarding Compton Educational Center. This has also been
passed by the Senate and the faculty. Also needs to be inserted into the Constitution and
By-Laws.
3. Constitutional Amendment deleting the VP of Legislative Action and creating the VP
Instructional Effectiveness. Passed by the Senate, Nov. 2008. Not passed by the faculty
at large. This new position was seen as a more immediate need for the Academic Senate.
This has not yet been passed on to the faculty at large for voting. This post will probably
be for the ACL/SLO coordinator/s .
4. Constitutional Amendment creating the VP of Academic Technology. Passed by the
Senate, April 2006. Not passed by the faculty at large.
5. Constitutional Amendment allowing for staggered co-VP positions. Passed by the
Senate in Spring 2011. Will go to a faculty at large vote.
PM noted that technology is everywhere and so the VP Academic Technology is an
important post, and would create links between the various technology committees. The
reason it had not gone to the faculty at large before is that the Academic Senate has been
dealing with the idea of release time, but the time has now come to send it to the faculty for
voting. Mr. Wells asked if there WAS release time for the VP position. PM noted that it was
not an issue at the moment as the technology committees met so infrequently, but the issue
could be raised again in the future. Ms. Ichinaga asked whether the position would serve as a
voice of advocacy for faculty on technology matters. PM said he saw it as more of a
communication liaison at the moment, but more advocacy is needed. CG noted that it was the
VP duty to represent the Academic Senate position on matters.
Mr. Marcoux asked if the VP Instructional Effectiveness post would get release time. CG said
she would be willing to give a little of her release time for this position as it involves Program
Review. Ms. Halonen asked if the current VP Legislative Affairs has no release time, and the
answer was no.
Mr. Panski requested that if and when changes to the by- laws are done, faculty be informed.
Discussion of Senate Functioning – Christina Gold (CG)
CG asked that the Academic Senate conduct a quick self-survey using Clickers, to be followed
by a discussion of the purpose and effectiveness of the Senate.
Here is a breakdown of the survey:
1. I understand the 10+1 purview of the Senate.
Fully = 18%
Partially = 57%
Not at All = 25%
CG noted that this information is always in the front of the Senate packet.
2. The Senate adequately represents faculty and students in academic and professional
matters?
Agree fully = 10%
Agree somewhat = 72%
Disagree = 17%
Don’t know = 0%
3. I understand the role the senate plays in collegial consultation at ECC?
Fully = 19%
Partially = 77%
Not at all = 4%
4. The Senate voice is fully heard and considered in collegial consultation committees?
Agree entirely = 4%
Agree partially = 21%
Disagree = 75%
Don’t know = 0%
5. Senate committee reports should be given once a month, unless there is a pressing issue?
Agree fully = 60%
Agree partially = 28%
Disagree = 12%
6. I would like more opportunities to express my opinions about academic and professional
matters during Senate meetings?
True = 28%
False = 72%
7. Senators should receive a car allowance and iPad as compensation for their hard work?
True = 92%
False = 8%
Mr. Ahmadapour had hoped to have some discussion on the purpose of the Senate, but said he
would wait on this as most Senators had left.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 1:58pm.
Cs/ecc2011